Westminstenders: Zombies don't have friends. Is Johnson the de facto PM now?

[RedToothBrush]

And so the Zombie PM lives on.

Some might say that the Tory Party conference has been the thing that has really killed her, with one more blow needed to the head.

But had she already lost the battle within the party?

What is curious is how its now the hard liners who have got behind May. Why is this? They did so BEFORE the conference, not after May's speech. They are not known for suffering those they see as weak. They are there for target practice. Why have leopards seemingly changed their spots?

The truth is that just before and after her Florence speech Boris Johnson repeatedly undermined her and showed his authority was superior to May's. He may have backed down publically, but May backed down with policy, doing u-turns on her 'concessions' to the EU. Johnson was leading May and the Tory Party and not the other way around. That's what the conference was about and May's bad luck just played to their agenda.

May could be likened to the elderly Hindenburg, desperately trying to cling to power, and trying to appease the far right on the advise of von Papen who thought it could be controlled and contained. Whilst the right push it further and further, after each concession to them which they take as weakness, for their own political gain and shot at power. What would a successful far right leader in this country have to look like? A cut price Churchill pushing the values of fake patriotism? The historical parallel isn't hard to find and to fit to the political reality of today.

The irony emerging is that the EU Commission is starting to look like its more on our side than the EU27, tired of our nonsense and insults.

In this situation there can be no deal. Unless something drastic happens we are headed directly for a state of emergency.

The much forgotten and equally important dealing over the WTO is going as badly as the EU one. What do we expect with Liam Fox in charge and next to no accountability from the press or from parliament?

The hard right, obviously are making the calculated gamble that they have seized the hostage May away from the Liberals who had started to get her to see the reality. They will now do what they can to protect her, and support her. Afterall, why would you challenge her, if you felt you could control her? They have the perfect scapegoat and can protect their own political hides for the time being.

The most obvious sign of this, is Gove leaping to her defence in a way that is so ridiculously over the top.

The hard right have nothing to fear from a chaotic exit. Indeed they have much to profit from it. And they always have the means to leave if it gets too bad. They fear staying in the EU. Why IS that? Its almost as if many of them have something to hide...

Grants Shapp's intervention, is beginning to look like he was set up, with it being leaked that he was leading calls for a leadership election privately and had no intention of doing so publically until outted. The effect has been it has shored up her position, making it harder for May to even to resign either for personal or political reasons. It also casts any dissenters as 'traitors' whilst the hard right casts the image of the 'loyalists'.

Of course the hard right's gamble also rests on three other things; they know they are starting to lose the argument, they have done the maths and don't think they will have the numbers to ensure a hard right candidate makes the final two in a leadership battle and they think they can control the rest of the party because they fear Corbyn more.

Perhaps the best chance we have for a deal now does lie in a collapse of the government in the near future. This seems to be the position that the EU are taking by stepping up talks with Labour.

Just how much will Tory Liberals act in the best interests of the country and stand up to the hard right of the party. They have the numbers to get things through with Labour. But Labour want the government to collapse, so the balance of power ultimately relies on the hard right's support. Its hard to envisage Labour stepping up in the national interest any more than the Tory Right compromising.

I suspect the Hard Right ultimately fear the EU more than Corbyn. If a collapse happens it will be because the hard right will not compromise and they are prepared to push their luck on that, and this is the weapon they have over May. I suspect they figure they have little to lose by pursuing this direction. Its do or die for them anyway.

Of course what happens at home and what happens in the EU talks are also different things. The UK could well be promising more than they say at home, and this seems to be the case. But the infighting at home, jeopardises a deal even if one is reached by the EU commission as our diplomatic appearance through our antics and rhetoric at home, will convince the EU27 to reject it, and any compromise. Another gamble the Tory Right might be keen on to win over the domestic audience with their faux patriotism.

Of course, May could simply resign... She won't. She's a politician who lacks self awareness and arrogant in her own political ambition. A bit of a pep talk about how great she is and how she is doing things right and she believes it, as she is totally disconnected from the reality of things as the election proved in all its glory. She only listens to voices she agrees with...

So the Zombie PM lead by the De Facto PM will limp on. Its a game of chicken over who will lead to a collapse of government now between the liberals and the hard right.

At least for now. A leadership election is what is wanted by the press but not the party. The media want the drama more than the Tories.

If it hasn't changed within a month or so, the moment may have passed and it might be too late to salvage anything, such is the damage being done to our diplomatic relations. Start prepping in serious by Christmas, if we are still headed this way.

Please tell me, my reading of the situation is wrong...

Faisal Islam @ faisalislam
Missed this: Labour's Lords chief whip...Lords will feel enfranchised to amend anything not given time to be discussed in Commons - 100s

Steve Bassam @ stevethequip
Given Leadsom's announcement on Withdrawal Bill timetable yesterday I can't see the bill completing Lords stages until next April #Torychaos

Gosh.

What a shock... if only we'd seen that coming...

Oh, and I just have to say Longworth was full of it. Remember when they said Brexit wouldn't cost a penny, it was all project fear and in fact we'd all be saving the 10 billion every year. Well, Longworth was castigating Hammond for not releasing the millions to prepare for no deal.

Will that motivate May come out with the unelected house of Lords again, I wonder? Bet it won't stop her packing a few of her cronies in there on her way out of office.

May, Davis, Barnier and Juncker having dinner tomorrow.

How much red wine will be drunk, how many insults thrown and who will win the after dinner games? (Clue Theresa and David : let Jean and Michel win)

@ProfMarkElliott
Mark Elliott Retweeted Jo Maugham QC
MPs seem to be under misapprehension that UK legislation can stop Article 50 in its tracks. It can't. +

Interesting thread.
Maugham disagrees.

Once triggered, If article 50 has been correctly triggered (and the EU seem to accept that it has), doesn't there have to be a joint agreement to stop it. In principle.

Lost the thread but think that's more or less it. Calleach1
"Britain could choose to revoke, we(EU) couldn't possibly comment" type scenario.
publiclawforeveryone.com/2017/02/17/the-three-knights-opinion-on-brexit-a-response/

^New HS2 fears as large crack opens up on land where train line will run
Residents claim high-speed rail company has not taken West Yorkshire area’s coal mining legacy into account^

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/oct/15/hs2-fears-as-crack-opens-on-land-where-line-will-run

Is this a metaphor for the brexit?

I wonder if Juncker will goad TM into holding another election .

That Torygraph front page

The thread:

@ProfMarkElliott
MPs seem to be under misapprehension that UK legislation can stop Article 50 in its tracks. It can't.

@JolyonMaugham
So there is a cross-party bid to stop the cliff edge Brexit fruit loops tanking the economy. www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/14/cross-party-group-no-deal-theresa-may-brexit-eu …

‏ @ProfMarkElliott

Parliament can, of course, legislate to insist it must approve any deal before Ministers agree to it. Withdrawal Bill could so require. +

‏ @ProfMarkElliott 11h
But the default position is that Article 50 will operate to eject UK from EU at end of March 2019, deal or no deal. +

‏ @ProfMarkElliott 11h
Parliament cannot unilaterally change the effect in EU law of Article 50. If MPs refused to approve any deal, A50 would still operate +

‏ @ProfMarkElliott 11h
And Article 50 would operate too if the UK Government and the EU failed to reached any deal, however much Parliament might disapprove. +

@ProfMarkElliott

There is, of course, the possibility that Parliament could require the UK Government to rescind its Article 50 notification. +

@ProfMarkElliott
But that UK legal duty would have meaningful bite only if Article 50 is unilaterally revocable in EU law: a Q without any clear answer. +

@ProfMarkElliott
Further possibility, according to 'Three Knights' Opinion', is that Article 50 will not operate in March 2019 without more UK legislation. +

‏ @ProfMarkElliott
However, I find the 'Three Knights' view unpersuasive for reasons set out in this blogpost: publiclawforeveryone.com/2017/02/17/the-three-knights-opinion-on-brexit-a-response/ … +

@ProfMarkElliott

So while unilateral revocation & 'Three Knights' approach are possible escape routes, their availability is far from clear.

‏ @ProfMarkElliott
One final possibility is that Parliament could require UK Ministers to negotiate with EU27 for agreed cancellation of Article 50 process. +

@ProfMarkElliott
But that possibility offers no guarantee, not least b/c it turns upon stance of the EU27: a matter plainly beyond UK Parliament's control.

@JolyonMaugham

I don't think there's any misapprehension, Mark. There's a view - arguably right - that it can (see the Three Knights opinion) and 1/2

@JolyonMaugham

a view - certainly right - that it can with the permission of the r27 or if unilateral revocability is permissible. 2/2

@ProfMarkElliott

Thanks. I was only getting started when you responded to that tweet; the thread addresses those points, as you will see.

@JolyonMaugham

The thread does. But my tweet stands. Contrary to your first tweet (with respect) I don't think MPs are misapprehending the situation.

Collapse in foreign investment has started. Global Britain huh?

The Telegraph Business section today seems to have forgotten to push the sunny uplands theme
In addition to the horrifying downward revision of half a trillion quid that red posted - which is in even in Fox biz news ...

Those on a comfy pension < core Tory Brexit vote > may be screwed too if Brexit causes a recession:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/10/15/one-five-ftse-100-pension-funds-risk-failure-recession/

One in five FTSE 100 ­defined benefit pension schemes would be at risk of failure if Britain entered ­another economic downturn, research reveals

In a “stressed” scenario – such as a recession – the combined pension deficits of the blue-chip index would jump by £100bn, equivalent to four years of pre-tax profits, according to a study by consultants Cardano and Lincoln Pensions.

In such a scenario a fifth of FTSE 100 firms would face pension risks worth 30pc or more of their market value, making widespread scheme failure more likely.

lala with all this terrible economic news of what's in the pipeline, May or her killer successor would be mad to call a GE ....
unless she knows there's much worse to come

JJPatrick claims she's off to fix the 'no deal' tonight.

After graylings comments about just growing more food, twitter is full of comments thos morning that people will start hoarding and we'll have to dig for victory.

We seem to be well ahead with the brexit planning here. Nice to see everyone else talking about it.

twitter is full of comments thos morning that people will start hoarding and we'll have to dig for victory.

Yes but the Brexiteers on these threads have been absolutely adamant that it's all hysteria and overreaction. I do hope they're all putting their money where there mouth is and very patriotically not buying the occasional extra tin of beans or pack of pasta. Or I might find their lack of faith disturbing. What do we think?

David Allen Green retweeting his thread on a50 reversability from last week:

Law and policy‏***@davidallengreen*

This was my thread on whether A50 unilaterally revocable.

Yes, but would still also need EU27 acceptance or, if not, an ECJ ruling.

Law and policy‏***@davidallengreen*
1. A thread, fwiw, on why I now think Article 50 is unilaterally revocable, after 18 months of being undecided.
2. Have in your mind's eye the zoom function on Google maps or Google Earth.
3. Let's zoom in on Article 50(2).
Article 50 is here:
www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-european-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html
4. "A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention...".
5. Let's zoom in on one word: "intention".
That is what is being notified. Not a decision.
But an intention.
6. But what intention? Any old intention?
We need to zoom back out.
7. Let zoom in on Article 50(1): "Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirement"
8. So that is the intention. But what if a Member State changes its decision "in accordance with its own constitutional requirements"?
9. The implication must be that the change of intention must be capable of being notified too.
10. And as a general principle of law, notices and notifications are revocable, if it does not take immediate effect. A50 gives two years.
11. So at first glance, good argument for unilateral revocation.
But.
12. We need to zoom out to A50.
If there is unilateral revocation, this could also undermine the scheme of Article 50 as a whole.
13. A departing member state could tactically revoke notification to re-set two year deadline.
Hokey-cokey negotiation.
14. So looking at A50 as a whole, there is a good argument that unilateral revocation(s) would undermine A50's scheme and structure.
15. And that was where my thinking took me. Good legal arguments either way. The wording suggested yes, scheme of A50 suggested no.
16. An ambiguous position. And given clauses should never be interpreted in vacuum, maybe "no" was better construction of A50 as a whole.
17. And then recently I had a further idea, which shifted me from 'undecided' to 'yes'. That A50 was unilaterally revocable.
18. We need to zoom out from Article 50(2) and even from Article 50.
We need to zoom now to the EU treaties as a whole.
19. Article 50 is also not in a vacuum. Not stand alone.
The construction of Article 50 would be done in the context of EU treaties.
20. (A word on terminology. You "interpret" words and phrases. But you "construct" a provision to work out its legal effect.)
21. The treaties are there to promote and provide for ever close union.
Explicit and implicit in many places, including Article 1 TEU.
22. So, if there is an ambiguity, it would be presumably decided on basis of what kept union together rather than not together.
23. Otherwise the treaty principles of ever closer union etc would not have effect.
Unilateral revocation would have benefit of doubt.
24. This is only an opinion. No lawyer knows. And it would help if A50 had been better drafted.
25. But I think considering A50 in context of EU treaties as a whole, notification of an intention must be capable of unilateral revocation.
26. I hope this was helpful and not too much of a bore.
/ends

Law and policy‏***@davidallengreen*

There is no "unilateral" revocation of Article 50 - as it would have to be accepted as effective by EU27 or, failing that, the ECJ.
On balance, a unilateral revocation is likely to be accepted by EU27 and/or ECJ.
But still needs their acceptance of its effect.
If UK "unilaterally" revokes A50, but is not accepted by EU27 and/or ECJ, then UK still out of EU.
A parliamentary vote makes no difference
In summary: if Brexit - or a "no deal Brexit" - is to be stopped, it will need something more than a parliamentary vote.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/15/philip-hammond-brexit-chancellor-hard-eu-exit

I noted this paragraph:
At the same time, to take a specific example, there is serious talk of shifting from the jurisdiction of the European Medicines Agency to that of the US Food and Drug Administration: the FDA may be in Maryland, but at least it is not subject to the European court of justice. Again: is this truly what Britons were voting for in last year’s referendum?

At least with the EMA, if we stay in the EU we would have input. With the FDA - never. How is this 'taking back control'?

What do we think?
Notice one poster in particular who's thrilled by nazi win in austria. I think they all piss in the same pot. Funded by the same, I presume.

Just to add to that 'taking back control' bit. The Sunday Politics also explored the ports. It mentioned one way of easing the congestion at Dover was to extend the Le Touquet agreement. French passport checks in Britain would be extended to include British goods and British exports.

So the French officials would do the checking for the UK. It would have to be inland as much as possible to ease congestion. So one option is to get other countries to do the checking. So much for taking back control. One of the Belgian haulage firms were on such a strict schedule that there half an hour out and it is a disaster for the factory.

I don't understand how the FDA would work for the UK. They are a different type of organisation to the EMA. The FDA have more wide ranging scope. The EMA do a lot of oversight and coordination. There are still health authorities in the each member state. Would the MHRA just rubberstamp decisions made by the FDA? What about recalls and investigations? Would the UK be privy to US federal information? Some may be sensitive to the industry and they might not share it. What would the UK have to pay for any of the privileges? At the same time as replacing functions previously carried out by the EMA on their behalf. I can't imagine it as being satisfactory.

I'm getting dizzy, now. Only plus I can think of is the requirement for more personnel. But if the exchequer is down 10's of billions (notwithstanding the 10 billion up), how can it pay for more staff.

how can it pay for more staff

Will be staffed by 'volunteer' women, who having done voluntary shifts in local schools and hospitals and planted and picked the vegetables, will be there to serve, wage free.

Equalities Act is going, so no need to worry about pesky equal pay or divorces.
UK government watchdog pushes for new British 'right to equality' to stop Brexit leading to more discrimination

The Equality and Human Rights Commission has warned Britain is losing its ‘safety net
’
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-discrimination-laws-right-to-equality-uk-equalities-watchdog-eu-a7999461.html

It all sounds a bit handmaid's tale in a post apocalyptic world...

Oh, yes. Had LBC on this morning. They are desperate and delighted to big up the Austrian far right results. You'd think they won the election outright, but the far right party came second.

"The world's youngest leader has just been elected", but it is a party leader, not the leader of the gov't.

Austria's far-right is on course to take a place in the country's government after a strong showing in Sunday's parliamentary elections.

The country's main conservative party, led by current foreign minister Sebastian Kurz, topped the poll with 31.4 per cent of the vote, but is expected to seek a coalition with the far-right Freedom Party (FPO), which is posting one of its strongest showings on record.

Austrian politics appears to have shifted strongly to the right, with early projections showing the conservative OVP up nearly eight per cent and the far-right FPO up around five per cent.

Germany's far-right AfD says it will fight an 'invasion of foreigners' Near-final results put the right-wing Freedom Party in second place with 27.4 per cent, while the centre-left Social Democrats (SPO), which has also not ruled out an alliance with the far-right, got 26.7 per cent.

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/austria-election-exit-poll-result-sebastian-kurz-ovp-latest-projection-freedom-far-right-a8001811.html

Not saying any increase in these far right parties is good. But it is not as it is being reported in the UK. Maybe the UK papers and LBC should look at how the UK elects the largest bloc of far right as UKIP to the EP. It will be much reduced if the UK leaves.

So the French officials would do the checking for the UK

If, as a so-called "Brexiteer", your plans involves - at least to some degree - reliance on the French to help the English then you have made some very bad life choices.

This isn't a snarky dig at the French - btw. I speak as someone who holds Concorde in the same regards as the Apollo missions as a pinnacle of engineering. It's just an observation that devolving powers for foreign governments to exercise on your behalf is almost the antithesis of "taking back control".

On a separate note. Is there not a case to be made that just before May jets off to Brussels - perhaps at the departure gate - she gives David Davies his P45 ? Surely her having to go there is a clear admission that he's a total nincompoop and best left at home with some crayons and an old tablecloth someone has told him is a map of Europe ?